[US] Airborne Carbines

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Demon767]

you are all mindless drones.

[PonySlaystation]

But ABR already have BARs. So they already have AI. And stop assuming that a carbine would have to be much stronger than the BAR. How it works now should probably stay in the future, so Airborne are used as AT and Airborne Riflemen as AI. The thing here is that there are already enough BAR riflemen in the game, it's the most used infantry+upgrade in the game. Imagine if Fallshirmjägers didn't have cloak and their only upgrade were grenadier lmgs. Their playstyle would be extremely generic and work exactly like grenadier focused companies.

What's much better than this is to have alternatives. A logical alternative already exists in the game, the m1 carbine. A more interesting alternative to the BAR, the carbine could be made to excel at short or medium ranges. Something like this is not a huge balance change but rather a positive change to gameplay.

[Mysthalin]

you are all mindless drones.

+1

Wake me once the OMG-esque lul of conformity and stagnation goes away.

[Mysthalin]

AB are utility units, not frontline infantry. If you can't tell the difference then I don't really know what to tell you. The best part of AB is their survivability.  They shouldn't be able to hold their own against a gren squad, if they did, that'd be all everyone would run, just hordes of AB. Giving AB even an LMG is a mistake.

So what, you're saying AB are nothing but a posh minesweeper squad? Because, as far as I'm aware - that's what a utility squad is. Non-combat infantry that are designed for specific, non-combat yet still vital roles like mine-sweeping, building and mine-laying.
As far as I'm aware, the definition for AB has ALWAYS been parachute elite infantry. If equipped with grenades/satchels their role would be defined as assault, and if equipped with RRs their role would add the words "anti-tank".

No. People would not run hordes of AB if given access to the M2 carbine upgrade for the exact same reason people don't run hordes of stormtroopers. It's simply too expensive pool and munitions wise to do so. Oh, and you have a much better time putting more firepower in the field through stormtroopers because they only cost 5 popcap compared to the airborne's 6.

For 6 pop you're getting the allies most survivable infantry platform with the best handheld weapon in the game

Rangers are more survivable than Airborne, having access to Elite armour over Airborne armour. Yes, they have 5 HP/man less, but not having to move every single second of their existence helps in little things such as seeking cover in a fight.

If you gave AB grease guns, we'd be back here in a week complaining about how OP they are due to ab armour

Yes, because gaining 0.75 rec acc while moving will ever so off-set the 0.2 accuracy you will suffer by moving with greaseguns. Oh and greaseguns are utter shit - worse than volk MP40s, actually. I would not suggest giving airborne that shitty upgrade.

There are more pressing issues atm.

Well, you just cut yourself with a knife and are bleeding profusely.. you should prob- Oh wait what am I saying, there's starving children in Africa. Stop whining and get back to work.


Oh and airborne are indeed broken as far as anti-infantry is concerned. If they weren't broken - nobody would have ever given them the BAR airborne in the first place. Remove the BAR, take away the long-range omnipotent dominance the units currently possess and grant them something that is both much cooler and much more balanced in the form of the M2 Carbine.

[RoyalHants]

AB needs the ability to throw mortar shells like in cod 5 imo

[Smokaz]

The notion that bars are so awesome stems out of the comparison with the LMG, and is a long-standing complaint of bad players. Yeah the LMG isn't very useful when people are using combined arms with armor or just pure armor/light vehicles. Surprise!

Bar aint that good bro, and its a hideous waste of munitions to buy bars for unupgraded riflemen. You'll get maybe one good supress out of them, barring passive use. They don't stay alive enough to really make this upgrade shine unless you have doctrine buffs for their platform survivability or their DPS out.

Sit in cover and bars can do very little vs  grens. I never grab lmgs, I seldom grab bars. And when I do, I use supression out of cover only because anything less than two squads supressing at the same green cover squad will fail.

But are bars good enough for AB riflemen? Damn right. Get some vet on them, heal when you can and abuse the fact that recrewing gives you the cooldown back. It's not a bad upgrade, often it can make its cost back, but you guys exaggerate the value of bars.

[quote="Blah blah I want to spam all ab armies with doctrine buffs encompassing all my AB type of units] /snip[/quote]

Utility unit means barappapa, its exellent for recrewing and a scout, its exellent for taking out bunkers and 88s with satchels. Its exellent against tanks, support weapons and paks.

Two AB squads can simply destroy a mortar by shooting their rrs at it in one volley. Weapon gets hit, destroyed, crew leaves offmap. No other handheld AT owns mortars that hard. Hell with some luck you can do the same to mg42s.

Pool costs doesnt stop anyone.

On a related note there's a lot of logic behind making the RR upgrade turning regular ab into 6 pop, and leaving them at 5 pop without.

[PonySlaystation]

The notion that bars are so awesome stems out of the comparison with the LMG, and is a long-standing complaint of bad players. Yeah the LMG isn't very useful when people are using combined arms with armor or just pure armor/light vehicles. Surprise!

Bar aint that good bro, and its a hideous waste of munitions to buy bars for unupgraded riflemen. You'll get maybe one good supress out of them, barring passive use. They don't stay alive enough to really make this upgrade shine unless you have doctrine buffs for their platform survivability or their DPS out.

If they are so much worse than the grenadier LMG then why should airborne have them too?

[pandaExpress]

AB rifles need a buff a rifle squad that can drop for more mp and upgrades cost more?
should give them ab armor or fire up but not both

[WildZontar]

I still don't see why you just can't give em darn Garands instead of Carbines. Sure, it may not fix anything, but how does giving Airborne garands actually break the game? You'll be taking as much damage from Airborne Garands as you would from Riflemen Garands no?

[8thRifleRegiment]

we did have garrands on a airbourne sqaud. Thats why theyre gone and only just plain rifleman now. its ridiuclous

[Mysthalin]

we did have garrands on a airbourne sqaud. Thats why theyre gone and only just plain rifleman now. its ridiuclous

It was the BAR that made them powerful. Not the garands.

[RikiRude]

It was the BAR that made them powerful. Not the garands.

+1

garand upgrade for AB, make it cost 20-30mu, because making a unit put out as much damage as a rifle squad should not be a big deal. give them a RR/Garand package of 200mu.

When AB stop not only are they just regular rifles with shitty guns, they are 280mp rifles with shitty guns taking up 6 pop cap.

did falls really need rifle nades? riflenades which work wayyyy better on them than tommys with an lt for some reason.

[Mysthalin]

M2 Carbines man! Garands really aren't worth 20 munitions lol.

[RikiRude]

M2 Carbines man! Garands really aren't worth 20 munitions lol.

i like your idea too, either way both ideas are super OP 

[WildZontar]

Garands could be an upggrade in the doctrine tree  

But when it comes right down to it, Airborne (when not moving) are just Riflemen with shittier Rifles.

+1

garand upgrade for AB, make it cost 20-30mu, because making a unit put out as much damage as a rifle squad should not be a big deal. give them a RR/Garand package of 200mu.

If giving them damage output of Rifles isn't a big deal, then why do they need to pay munitions for such a small upgrade? 

[EliteGren]

But when it comes right down to it, Airborne (when not moving) are just Riflemen with shittier Rifles.

This is incorrect, they have way more HP than riflemen

[DarkSoldierX]

Cmon guys... Airborne are great AT, Great HP, alot of men, Alright armor dudes.

They dont need AI, they need there personalty as weak in AI.



Keep airborne rifles the same.

And please don't add assault airborne.


Its a fail idea.

[TheVolskinator]

AB are supposed to be fail AI guys, thats the way Relic MADE them. If they raped everything like fucking Band of Brothers, why would anyone build anything else? Leave them be, they're fine. L2useAB rifles (which IMO could use AB armor. Thats just me).

Grease guns are better then MP40s, whoever said theyre worse is dead wrong. L2p.

[WildZontar]

This is incorrect, they have way more HP than riflemen

Riflemen-330 Airborne-420 Okay then,

Airborne are just Riflemen with 90hp more and with bad rifles . 

Cmon guys... Airborne are great AT, Great HP, alot of men, Alright armor dudes.

They dont need AI, they need there personalty as weak in AI.



Keep airborne rifles the same.

And please don't add assault airborne.


Its a fail idea.

How exactly does giving them Garands make them become total AI? It still keep them weak as AI since they have no BARS, and I would still use them as AT.

Garands do 10 damage, Carbines do 7.

I've also checked a few other stats, although I don't know how they would help support myself, I might aswell see what they do.

Moving Accuracy
Carbine - 0.8
Garand - 0.5

Scatter Angle
Carbine - 10
Garand - 5

The reloads and cooldowns are also different from each other as well. I'm still failing to see where this small Rifle change could cause a catastrophe and make Airborne OP, could someone explain?


Also, when did people start talking about giving AB Greaseguns? Or Thompsons? That's a terrible idea xD

[pandaExpress]

L2useAB rifles (which IMO could use AB armor).

+1